Live data from Hacker News

NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

livescience.com

91–100 of 151 posts

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Astronauts are of a breed apart. They're strapped onto a literally bomb which launches them into a vacuum, and windows where there is no chance of a mission abort. They've pretty much accepted a risk of death that most would simply not tolerate. Ex-military is common for astronauts for a reason.

Going on a spaceship is probably safer than driving a car.

Per mile, sure.

Per launch? I think the "everyone died" rate is about, what, 1.2% of crewed launches?

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#93
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might actually be a net benefit and lead to de-stigmatizing human health conditions

You go first, then. Let’s see your full medical records without redaction if you think it’s a net benefit. I think there's value in reducing stigma around health conditions, but forcing poor people to reveal their medical conditions to the world isn't it.

I'm genuinely fine sharing my medical history, but I don't know if my lack of shame about e.g. testicular torsion, or the way that I lost my notes for a bit and unnecessarily got repeats of vaccines I'd already had, are a sign of being in possession of a boring medical history, or an indication of an uncommonly diminished shame response.

Whatever it is, I am aware that my lack of concern here is something which makes me different from normal people. I don't really get why people in general are ashamed of their medical histories, but I nevertheless absolutely do support everyone's right to keep such secrets, because there's a few specific cases where the medical history reveals something socially damaging either in the present or with a risk of it becoming so in the future, the obvious example of which is an abortion given the US seems to be facing a loss of freedom in this regard.

(Perhaps most people have something socially damaging in their medical histories, and I've just not noticed because nobody says the thing?)

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#94
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You go first, then. Let’s see your full medical records without redaction if you think it’s a net benefit. I think there's value in reducing stigma around health conditions, but forcing poor people to reveal their medical conditions to the world isn't it.

I'm genuinely fine sharing my medical history, but I don't know if my lack of shame about e.g. testicular torsion, or the way that I lost my notes for a bit and unnecessarily got repeats of vaccines I'd already had, are a sign of being in possession of a boring medical history, or an indication of an uncommonly diminished shame response. Whatever it is, I am aware that my lack of concern here is something which makes…

I don't know about 'a few specific cases'. STIs, mental health issues, pregnancies (interrupted or not, voluntarily or not), contraception methods and/or lapses, anything often misunderstood like MS or neurodegenerative diseases, huntington, substance use/abuse (voluntary or not), victim of assault (sexual or not), sterility/fertility/impotency/incontinence, any manageable medical issue someone might use to not give you a job, to rent you an apartment, although you do actually manage it well...

None of those I'd want shared anywhere, to anyone, against my will. Those (overall) are not rare.

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#95

It's great we can bring them down. What a terrifying experience to have a medical issue on the space station. Kidney stone? Ruptured appendix? intestinal blockage? How could you keep calm so far away!

I used to work in ISS mission control, this is not an emergency return but an early return

Also coming down on the Soyuz is pretty routine and only takes a few hours- I’d say it was overall a far less risky situation than being in Antarctic on a deep ocean vessel with appendicitis etc

We have dozens and (hundreds behind them) of men and women monitoring those folks from a global network of control centers 24 hrs a day- The station is mostly commanded from the ground and plans and procedures exist for everything

- if anything its all over orchestrated and over-planned in my opinion, owing to national politics, corporate contracts and international bureaucracy

Is it risky- yes obviously-but I’d argue its less risky then being out at the south pole in winter

See: https://nasawatch.com/iss-news/crew-medical-telecon-summary/

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#97

It's great we can bring them down. What a terrifying experience to have a medical issue on the space station. Kidney stone? Ruptured appendix? intestinal blockage? How could you keep calm so far away!

whatever is the cause, it is not immediate - or they would've been on the ground couple days ago so no, not appendix

Maybe testicular torsion triggered by zero-G conditions?

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#98
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going on a spaceship is probably safer than driving a car.

Per mile, sure. Per launch? I think the "everyone died" rate is about, what, 1.2% of crewed launches?

Not a good sales pitch for commercial space flights

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's only 250 miles

Maximum operating depth of a Nuclear submarine is 3,350 ft.

Source?

The operating depth of most submarines is ~300 -- 500m (980 -- 1640 ft), roughly one-third to one-half the depth you cite.

The two USN nuclear submarines lost due to pressure-hull failures, the Thresher (1963) and Scorpion (1968) both failed at depths of 1,200 to 2,000 ft. Threser's test depth was 1,300 ft (400m), and she was operating at about this depth when communications were lost. Scorpion likely failed at 1,530 ft. (470m).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Thresher_(SSN-593)#Cause>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Scorpion_(SSN-589)#Disappe...>

There are other submersible vessels in the US Navy which can and have operated at greater depths, notably the submersible Alvin and bathyscaphe Trieste II, but those are not combat vessels. Alvin's test deopth is 6,500m (21,300 ft). Triest II's predecessor, Trieste, reached the floor of the Challenger Deep in the Marianas Trench, deepest known spot in the oceans, at 10,916m (35,814 ft). Trieste II incorporated the pressure sphere from its predecessor.

A more conventional, but still experimental, submarine, the USS Dophine (AGSS-555) was a deisel-electric research submarine which reached a depth in excess of 3,000 ft (910 m), probably in 1969. The boat was in-service through 2006.

Re: NASA announces unprecedented return of sick ISS astronaut and crew

#100
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

whatever is the cause, it is not immediate - or they would've been on the ground couple days ago so no, not appendix

Maybe testicular torsion triggered by zero-G conditions?

That's a "needs to be in the OR in 6 hours" situation; no way they waited several days for it.
Post reply on HN